You say you want more than two cores. The only viable options in that area is quad-core Sandy Bridge processors. More specifically, core i5 2300 or 2400 if you don't want to overclock. Otherwise, the i5 2500k for overclocking. The 2600k is only for users who need the hyperthreading.

I thought you meant $300 for the whole computer, not the CPU. $300 CPUs are poor value today. It makes little sense to pay more than the cost of a 2500K for a desktop CPU and I personally would not consider paying more than the cost of a 2400. The 2500K is for overclocking and if you want to overclock, it would be best to wait until April for the 22nm 3570K.

Currently, which models of desktop processor from either Intel or AMD offer the best value? I'm building a desktop PC, want more than two cores and am considering spending under $300.

Below $300, if you apps dont benefit a lot from hyperthreading, i5 2500K imo is a really nice CPU for the money, if you dont need the HD3000 or an overclock CPU, check the i5 2400. Now if you do benefit from hyperthreading and still below $300, Intel Core i7-2600.

All the intel CPU line will be referesh by april 8 with ivy bridge, expect replacement both the i7 2600K and i5 2500K on launch, the gains on performance wont be that big as its mostly a die shrink, maybe around 10%, but they will consume less power, but one decent gain in the integrated GPU, the HD4000 will be around 30% faster than the HD3000.

JJ wrote:

Doesn't have to be cooled passively, although I will at least want a good aftermarket _quiet_ CPU cooler.

What will be using the PC for? As long as you aren't gaming there is value in the onboard GPU on Sandy Bridge processors as that should be enough graphics power. And it means no discrete graphics card which means less heat and (perhaps) one less fan assuming that you were considering a graphcs card with a fan.

edit - Here is a quote from a SPCR review in March of 2011 - I don't know enough about AMD's lineup to know if things have changed materially in the last ten months:

Quote:

Unfortunately, we don't have many positive things to say about AMD's latest dual core processors. The reality is that the K10 architecture is looking really long in the tooth and it's going to take a lot more than clock speed bumps to stay in the race. The fastest Athlon II and Phenom II X2's are still trying to keep up with Intel's previous generation Clarkdale CPUs, and as such they are completely outmatched by their new Sandy Bridge opponents. Not only is the i3-2100 faster, the difference in energy efficiency is massive, and the integrated graphics baked into every Sandy Bridge CPU also outperform AMD's offerings.

What will be using the PC for? As long as you aren't gaming there is value in the onboard GPU on Sandy Bridge processors as that should be enough graphics power. And it means no discrete graphics card which means less heat and (perhaps) one less fan assuming that you were considering a graphcs card with a fan.

The HD3000 can even handle some gaming (I was playing SC2 on my 2500K HTPC earlier this evening). Other games, not so much - from what I've seen, Civ5 is essentially unplayable on it. Certainly, for gaming in general you'd be better served going to an i3 and using the savings on a dedicated GPU. I'm just waiting for Kepler.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum